IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/acctbr/v44y2014i6p630-655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Epistemic commitment and cognitive disunity toward fair-value accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvain Durocher
  • Yves Gendron

Abstract

This paper critically explores knowledge/professionalization relationships in a jurisdictional context characterized by shifting standards of practice. Focusing on the growing movement toward fair value within accounting standards, we examine practitioners' reactions to the growing compulsory application of fair-value accounting standards. To make sense of these reactions, we introduce the notion of epistemic commitment , that is to say one's degree of allegiance to a given knowledge template. Utilizing 27 interviews with Canadian experienced accountants, we rely on epistemic commitment to analyze the extent of variability in practitioners' reactions to the standardization movement toward fair-value accounting. Our analysis demonstrates an important level of variability in practitioners' epistemic commitment toward fair-value accounting, highlighting a lack of cognitive unity in the field. Our findings point to other important professionalization issues: practitioners' inclinations to refer to profitability issues when reflecting on the appropriateness of standards; practitioners' conception of accounting as an objective technology; practitioners' hesitations in voicing deep-level concerns over implementation ambiguities and lack of professional cognitive authority. Overall, our study raises doubts about the professional status of accountancy.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvain Durocher & Yves Gendron, 2014. "Epistemic commitment and cognitive disunity toward fair-value accounting," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 630-655, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:44:y:2014:i:6:p:630-655
    DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2014.938012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00014788.2014.938012
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00014788.2014.938012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:44:y:2014:i:6:p:630-655. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RABR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.